Skip to main content

Security report for tuv.com

TÜV Rheinland · Technology · N/a

Low risk. 2 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS and DNS health.

Security score

79/100

Risk levelLow

0–100, higher is better. How it is calculated

TÜV Rheinland is a global service provider specializing in quality and safety services across multiple industries including technology, energy, and transportation. The company offers inspection, certification, consultation, training, and testing services, positioning itself as an established leader in its sector. The website reflects a professional and enterprise-grade digital presence with consistent branding and comprehensive service descriptions. Technically, the site employs modern tracking and marketing technologies such as Google Tag Manager, Cookiebot for consent management, Facebook Pixel, and Bing UET, indicating a mature digital marketing infrastructure. Security-wise, the website enforces HTTPS and provides a detailed cookie consent mechanism, though it lacks explicit security headers and a published security policy or incident response contacts. The absence of WHOIS data suggests privacy protection, which is typical for large enterprises to safeguard registrant information. Overall, the website is trustworthy, well-designed, and compliant with GDPR requirements, though improvements in security transparency and contact information availability could enhance trust further.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
88/ 100 · Low
Checks completed
7of 7

NIS2 Art. 21(2)

  1. (a) Risk analysis and security policies: Not visible from outside
  2. (b) Incident handling: One indicator
  3. (c) Business continuity, backups and crisis management: Not visible from outside
  4. (d) Supply chain security: Not visible from outside
  5. (e) Secure acquisition, development and maintenance, including vulnerability handling: Partly checked
  6. (f) Assessing the effectiveness of security measures: Not visible from outside
  7. (g) Cyber hygiene and security training: Not visible from outside
  8. (h) Cryptography and encryption: Partly checked
  9. (i) HR security, access control and asset management: One indicator
  10. (j) Multi-factor authentication and secured communications: Not visible from outside

This scan rated NIS2 with an earlier keyword method that is no longer shown; rescan for the per-article view. Risk management, continuity, supply chain, training, MFA, management oversight (Art. 20) and incident reporting (Art. 23) need internal evidence, and Guard cannot tell whether NIS2 applies to this organisation.

GDPR is indicative only, based on publicly visible signals: Articles 7, 12, 13 and 32 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Article 5(3) of the ePrivacy Directive. Not a certification or legal assessment.

Priority findings

2 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. SSL/TLS

    TLS encrypts the connection and proves the site is really yours. Weak or expiring certificates trigger browser warnings and put traffic at risk.

    • High

      Weak Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1

  2. DNS health

    DNS sends visitors and email to the right servers. Misconfigured records can cause outages or let someone redirect your traffic.

    • High

      Weak SPF Policy

      SPF record has permissive policy allowing any server to send email

      What to do: Use -all or ~all qualifier for better email security

Need hands-on remediation? Email guard@offseq.com

Keep watching tuv.com

This scan found 17 issues across 6 checks. Monitoring re-runs those checks daily, emails you when something material changes and records each fix, so you can show progress.

Daily monitoring

Recommended

€25per month

  • TLS certificates and expiry
  • DNS records
  • SPF, DKIM and DMARC
  • Security headers
  • GDPR and NIS2 posture
  • Exposed services
  • Third-party trackers
  • Security score drift

Email alerts on material changes and an exportable JSON history of every change.

Billed monthly to your card. Cancel anytime. The full timeline opens with your unlock code.

Full report

€39.90one-time

  • The complete analysis as a PDF you can cite
  • Email delivery with an unlock code
  • Lifetime access to this report

Prices incl. 21% VAT. Secure checkout by Mollie; sold by SEQ SIA, Latvia.

Results by check

Each check with its score, findings and the evidence it collected.

How this score is calculated

The security score runs 0–100, higher is better. It is the plain average of the security checks that completed in this scan, each counted equally. A check that could not run is left out: it counts neither as a pass nor as a fail.

Counted in this score

SSL/TLS
72
Security headers
75
Email security
70
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
88
Average
79

Not counted

  • NIS2 outside view: Re-weights evidence from the TLS, email, DNS, network and hygiene checks, so counting it would count that evidence twice. Shown on its own.
  • OffSeq Observations: An AI reading of the site, useful context but not reproducible evidence. Shown on its own.

Findings that cap the score at 49

Each of these is serious on its own, so while any is present the site cannot rate better than high risk, however good the other checks are.

  • The certificate is not trusted by browsers
  • The website is not served over HTTPS
  • A database, remote desktop, file-sharing or Telnet service is reachable from the internet
  • The page loads a script from a compromised source
  • The domain registration has expired
  • SPF authorises every server to send mail as the domain

Partial scans

When the site blocks Guard or most checks cannot run, the score covers only the checks that ran (usually DNS and email), is capped at 75 and is shown as partial, without a risk level.

Risk levels

  • Critical0–25
  • High26–49
  • Medium50–75
  • Low76–100

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention tuv.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
1,920
Employees
34
Customers
1,424
Third parties
462
Weak passwords
11%

Latest record dated 2026-06-03 · 68 subdomains affected

See the 10 newest leaked credentials

A one-off add-on to this report that lists the most recent identifier and password pairs OffSeq Breach holds for tuv.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

Masked preview

  • –wlan.tuv.com2026-06-03
  • –blueye.portal.tuv.com2026-05-27
  • –sct.de.tuv.com2026-05-18
  • –sct.de.tuv.com2026-05-11
  • –a.tuv.com2026-01-13

Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.

Open in Breach(opens in a new tab)Monitor on Breach(opens in a new tab)

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

TÜV Rheinland operates as an essential entity in the quality and safety services market, targeting corporate clients and industries requiring certification and inspection services. Its business model revolves around providing expert independent services that ensure compliance and safety standards. The company leverages partnerships with payment processors like Adyen and marketing platforms such as Facebook and Baidu to support its global operations. The website's extensive use of analytics and marketing tools indicates a data-driven approach to customer engagement and service optimization. TÜV Rheinland's market position is strong, supported by recognized certifications like ISO 27001, and its digital presence aligns with enterprise expectations. The lack of direct contact details on the homepage suggests a focus on structured client engagement channels possibly located deeper within the site.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a good security posture with enforced HTTPS and a robust cookie consent mechanism that complies with GDPR. However, the absence of key security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, and X-Frame-Options represents an area for improvement. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the analyzed content. The lack of a published security policy or incident response contact information limits transparency and may hinder rapid response to security incidents. The WHOIS data is privacy-protected, which is common for enterprises but reduces visibility into domain registration details. Overall, the security maturity is solid but could benefit from enhanced security header implementation and clearer incident response communication.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish comprehensive security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, and X-Frame-Options to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  2. Publish a dedicated security policy page and provide clear incident response contact channels such as security@ or abuse@ email addresses.
  3. Create and host a security.txt file to facilitate responsible vulnerability disclosure and improve security transparency.
  4. Enhance contact information availability on the website to improve user trust and support accessibility.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and tracking technologies to minimize privacy risks and ensure compliance with evolving data protection regulations.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
TÜV Rheinland
Description
TÜV Rheinland: Your global service provider. The independent experts stand for greater quality and safety for people, the environment and technology.
Key services
inspection, certification, consultation, training, testing
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Google Tag Manager, Cookiebot, Facebook Pixel, Bing UET, Webtrekk
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent banner with granular controls
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (via GTM), FullStory, Webtrekk
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Facebook Ads, Bing Ads
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel, Bing UET, FullStory
Marketing tools
Cookiebot, Digioh
Transparency
good

Site quality

Design
excellent
User experience
excellent
Content relevance
excellent
Navigation
excellent
Professionalism
excellent
Trustworthiness
high

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenge
  2. Strong cookie consent mechanism with detailed cookie categories and granular controls
  3. Multiple third-party tracking and marketing services integrated
  4. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found in the HTML content
  5. WHOIS data unavailable, likely privacy-protected
  6. Professional and consistent branding with clear business focus
  7. No security.txt or explicit security policy page found
  8. No visible forms collecting personal data on the homepage
  9. Good SEO and accessibility practices observed
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern technology stack including Google Tag Manager, Cookiebot for consent management, Facebook Pixel, Bing UET, and Webtrekk analytics. The HTML structure is valid and optimized for SEO with appropriate meta tags and Open Graph data. Performance is moderate with preloaded fonts and asynchronous script loading. Mobile optimization and accessibility are good, supporting a wide range of devices and users. No CMS was explicitly detected, suggesting a custom or proprietary platform. Hosting provider details are not disclosed in the content. The site could improve by adding more explicit accessibility features and optimizing performance further to achieve faster load times.
Standards and sources

Reference chips under each finding point to the standard, regulation or specification the finding relates to. They are taken from the official datasets below and mapped conservatively: a finding with no defensible link shows none. NIS2 and GDPR references mark where a finding is relevant evidence, not a compliance verdict. Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690 binds digital infrastructure and digital service providers; for other entities it is the most detailed public reading of the Article 21 measures. WCAG, EN 301 549, European Accessibility Act and Web Accessibility Directive references name the requirement an automated accessibility rule relates to; they are not a conformance verdict.

Retrieved 2026-10-25

Earlier scans of this domain

  1. 68/100Medium23 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with tuv.com. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.

Overall rating
Select a rating
4000 characters remaining

We’ll email you to confirm your review and keep your details private.

Community rating

No published reviews yet. Be the first to review tuv.com.

Feedback on this report

Rate this report, add an optional comment, and tell us if you want a security specialist to follow up.

Overall report quality
Select a rating
2000 characters remaining

We only use your feedback to improve Guard reports. Contact details are never shared.